no one will answer your question funandgun. truth is there is only better physics since it is tied to graphics. stories and how they are presented are opinions. ai and gameplay are mostly stagnant.

more horsepower will not improve on anything but graphics since that is what people buy. expect beautifully tesellated chest high walls with million polygon heads popin out from them for you to shoot at next gen.

@FunAndGun The reason for that is really quite simple: Piracy. Due to the insane amount of piracy on the PC platform, it is not seen as a profitable end-goal for games. Most games exclusive to the platform end up making a loss, without even considering the larger investment required to make a game that's able to utilise the new hardware appropriately.

PC will get games, but they will not be exclusive. Instead, the PC gets games at the same technical level as consoles, with perhaps some cheap Dx11 features such as Tessellation. That means that we'll see a significant improvement in game quality for PC when new consoles release.

These are some of the games with brilliant scripting and storyline which was near absent last gen (well on the level those games are on) and would be possible if PC's hadn't advanced. Also the animations in uncharted are amazing and there's nothing that can compare to it.

Yeah, i think graphics are fine the way they are now. I'm not saying an improvement in graphics is bad but it's not necessary. More RAM and a stronger processor would be much better than improved graphics.

It is completely possible to make great AI with the current hardware and yet Devs do not. Same with physics. There are plenty of great looking games this gen that are crap. Do we really want more of that?

Current systems are more than capable of providing AI that do not run backwards faster than you can run forward and the current gen can have better AI than those we too often see that have eyes in the back of their head, act like bullet sponges, never drop a weapon and run, never scream and cry when they are wounded as they realize they are really about to die, never panic, and are the most fool hardy bunch of doorknobs in the world.

I could also expound upon AI interactions that are non-kinetic in nature, all easily possible on current gen.

Most AI is dumber than a bag of hammers yet current hardware could do better. It isn't the hardware that is incapable but rather the developers or most often the producers who will not allocate the time and resources for better AI.

Plenty of real life reactions are easily capable on the current gen. But AI are not the advertisement poster for sales as are graphics. Developers are simply playing to that which gains them the most mileage - a pretty picture. That really says something about the shallow nature of gamers and our consumer demographic on the whole.

It is confounding so many believe next gen will improve the most important aspect of gaming - the gameplay. Better hardware isn't a magic bullet that suddenly engenders developers with creativity. It doesn't evolve them as developers over night or even over a year.

Better looking games that cost even more, with the same broken or tired mechanics and AI are precisely what we will get next gen with very few exceptions. I want to see some revolutionary thinking this generation.

Max Payne 3 and it's per bullet impact physics implementation prove this gen is more than able to handle a complex implementation that requires vast amounts of number crunching - because that's what's needed in that type of physics, godlike math. And the game still looks incredible.

I want to see more games like Dust 514 that are breaking the mold of the current gen thought methodology and the manner in which gamers interact with one another.

No one is denying that better more capable hardware make certain aspects of the process easier, but the fact is that hardware is not the stumbling block this generation that some think. We can't solve a problem if it cannot be honestly addressed and games like Max Payne 3 that have taken the time to do things right make fools of those that believe next gen hardware is required for next gen gaming.

Anyone remember those early tech demos of Alan Wake with the tornado hitting? Or the Star Wars Euphoria demo? That's what I'm excited for next generation. It might sound ridiculous, but I've always wanted a game that's a painstakingly created house that you could just go in and destroy with crazy precision, hopefully that'll be a possibility...I'm sick of ragdoll too.

@ Fun and Gun, there is a reason some of us play on PC, its not just PHYSX, and DX11. Its because of games like ARMA 3 and Planet-side 2. ARMA 3 has a 600km island to explore with near photorealistic graphics. Planetside 2 has 1000 vs 1000 matches with graphics better then Halo. And another huge reason is MODDING! I am currently making a mod for crysis 2 that is a whole game set in a open world Chicago, and the graphics on it are incredible, not to mention it's accurate to real Chicago, and looks photo-realistic at times, and features DX11 features on everything. Don't listen to what console gamers tell you, real pc gamers don't buy a gaming pc for better graphics, we buy it for all the things you can do on it that aren't possible on consoles.

I think i agree with you here i have a massive back log of games for my 360 and ps3. I have yet to finish uc2 halo cea op flahlash point point rr, lbp 2 driver, resistance 3 skyrim fifa 12 gt5 bf3 rise of knightmares and more and this is just on 2 consoles i still have uc ga mnr on the psv as well as rez mario 3ds Mario kark 3ds and zelda on my psv and 3ds. My biggest problem is i tend to get an hour or so a night and i cant get enough of forza 4 online at the mo it just keeps me going back to it but got a week off soon so going to get through as much as i can.

Any game that utilizes physx is a good example of what could be brought to current gen games, just look at mirrors edge or arkham city with phys x enabled. I've also heard CUDA can do wonders with AI, but sadly since crysis no game devs have taken the risk of pushing the boundaries for a pc only game.

The financial gamble is too much when its much safer to develop for current gen consoles as well as PC, so really all the pc is getting these days is nice shiney versions of console games, with the odd exclusive here and there, but again due to the costs of a lengthy production schedule required to make an engine that takes full advantage of the latest CPU's and GPU's its a big risk for the devs to take, especially if they're under the umbrella of a larger publisher. This is of course all just opinion and speculation from what i've observed in the industry over many years.

I don't know why but I have this feeling when we do see the jump, it's going to be half-life 3 on a new source engine. And thats when I'll finally get around to buying myself a PC... maybe... budget permitting :P

I'm all for new consoles so PC games can truly take advantage of the hardware at their disposal, instead of being developed with current gen consoles in mind. Even if I never get a PC capable of playing these games, I still love seeing the advances in gaming that it always brings time and time again.

"Can you give me some examples of games currently on PC that vastly improve on physics, AI, and new ways to play and tell a story that can't be done on current consoles?

Not graphically, but gameplay wise."

Congrats, you didn't answer the question at all. Almost everything you listed has to do with graphics, except for RTS, and that genre not working well on consoles has more to do with control scheme than hardware power. PS3 (and maybe 360... not sure) can use mouse and keyboard, and Move was shown to be great for RTS with RUSE, so even your RTS point is pointless. Number of units on screen... again, graphics. The only valid point you made was about mods and user created content in general.

OT - I'm still looking forward to games this year and next, so I have no need for a new console. I'll start wanting next gen to get here when Sony shows PS4 and some games I drool over. Until then, I'm fine. Anyway, I'd rather AI was improved than graphics next gen.

PS3 can do AA, V-sync, 1080p, 256 and prolly even 1000 + players, 1000's of onscreen characters, And ps3 for instance doesn't use DX at all, but custom OpenGL and other libraries. And there is yet to be a standard TV aimed at private and home household consumers with the following resolutions : 1200p, 1440p, 1600p. so anything but 1080p would be stupid because TV screens doesnt suppurt it and by the time it is supported they will already support much higher res like 4-8K resoultion. (next gen)

Infact BF3 with 64 players to would be possible.

You seem very biased, but truth be told consoles are ancient compared to current high end hardware.

The thing is that developers trade away neat visual elements to gain more detail, thats why games are 720P, sometimes with jaggies, at 30FPS, with tearing and with lower amounts of objects on screen. Its called trade offs and that is what you have to do to make the games the best they can be againts the devs vision and skill level, they need to weigh, measure and optimize to make their vision come alive and be the best game they can make.

Not every console game is a GOW 3, Uncharted, Killzone or Gears, but not every PC game is a Crysis, Metro or BF either. its all up to the devs and if you ask me they have been on the lazy side since Crysis. Thats true when small devs like 4A (metro series) and CD Project RED (the withcer series) make the BEST looking games around while Crytek, Epic games etc slacks off and releases no games to push the bar.

its nice to have new updated hardware but that also means developers will have to use more resources for the updated graphics which might make video game prices increase last gen we was paying about $54 for a game after tax, this gen is $65 after tax who knows maybe next gen ill go up to $75

you know all these fans for both ps3/xbox360 who are so ready for next gen will be waiting a while before anything comes out. Both ps3/xbox360 are still 250 and 300 so the prices have to come around 149-99 before we will see a new console. And when both are selling well why should either MS or sony bring out a new one? just to please few fans who just want a new hardware.

gears of war 3 look at how good the game looks and new crysis we don't need new consoles just yet, if new consoles can do 15% better than current ones than that's really not next gen so here is hoping both MS and sony announce their systems at E3 2013 and being them out in fall 2014, by than both ps3 and xbox360 will be under 149 and most likely sold close to 100 or over 100 million consoles